ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2022
iStent
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical outcomes of combined cataract surgery with iStent injectGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- Interventional glaucoma: Rethinking glaucoma treatment paradigms in the Asian context.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2025Review
- From first generation to the next: evolution and research trends in iStent technology.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Comparative evaluation of iStent versus iStent inject W combined with phacoemulsification in open angle glaucoma.PloS one · 2024Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Pairing iStent Inject Trabecular Micro-Bypass and iAccess Precision Blade Goniotomy in Patients with Open-Angle Glaucoma.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Article
- The PreserFlo MicroShunt in the Context of Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the cost-utility of iStent
methodsA Markov model was adapted to estimate the cost-utility of iStent
resultsIn the probabilistic base case analysis, iStent
conclusionThe iStent
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.